When scientists turn against evolution, mainstream colleagues dismiss them


A reader sent me a link to the following:

The philosopher Thomas Nagel is not taking phone calls.

His secretary at New York University says there have been hundreds, all wanting to reach the modern “heretic,” as a current magazine cover labels him, but he is not taking the bait.

All he did was argue in a new book the evolutionary view of nature is “false,” and now grand forces have descended upon him. He does not want to talk about it. The vicious reception handed Mind & Cosmos, which urges deep skepticism about evolution’s explanatory power, illustrates the perils of raising arguments against intellectual orthodoxy.
One critique said if there were a philosophical Vatican, Prof. Nagel’s work should be on the index of banned books for the comfort it will give creationists. Another headline proclaimed Prof. Nagel is “not crazy.”
The book has won a British booby prize for “Most Despised Science Book” and prompted sneering remarks the author is centuries behind the times, and somehow missed the Enlightenment.
“What has gotten into Thomas Nagel?” tweeted Steven Pinker, the Canadian cognitive scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

As a scientist, I have long known that proponents of evolution treat the subject more like a religious view than a scientific theory. This is somewhat also what the Ben Stein movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed revealed (see Ben Stein’s Expelled).

Which was?

Scientists who challenge too many claims associated with evolution are shunned by many academic institutions, as there is a tremendous amount of pressure at most “leading” academic institutions to squelch research that is not in support of evolution because it will affect their beliefs. Thus many ‘accept’ evolution and act like it is a scientific fact, when instead it is an unproven model that can scientifically be rebutted at various stages.

There is no real scientific doubt that evolution as the origin of life is false.  It violates too many known laws of biology.  It has gotten so bad, that some so-called ‘scientists’ are now claiming that life on Earth probably came from Mars as the Earth did not have certain building blocks like Mars does (see BBC: Life may have come from Mars?).  This is additional proof that some scientists who profess evolution as life’s origin realize that it does not hold up to true scientific scrutiny.

Various scientists know that the facts do not support that life could have spontaneously began on planet Earth, so they keep looking for other explanations that they hope are more plausible.  Last week, meteorites were claimed to possibly be the source:

Scientists have discovered unexpected ingredients for life — organic molecules never seen before in meteorites — inside a chunk of space rock that fell to Earth over California last year, scientists say.

The discovery comes from an analysis of the so-called Sutter’s Mill meteorite, which lit up the California night sky with a dazzling fireball in April 2012. Meteorite fragments from the event may shed light on the primordial ooze that helped give rise to life on Earth, researchers said.  http://www.space.com/22719-meteorite-surprising-organic-molecules.html

So Mars, meteorites?  Many scientists who have studied the matter realize that life did not spring up spontaneously on earth completely from earthly sources.  And because of that, many who do not wish to believe in God grasp for straws and make fun of those that have an understanding of what happened.

Recently, Richard Dawkins, instead of having a real answer to life’s origin, basically referred to it as a mystery (see Richard Dawkins refers to ‘mysterious origin’ of the universe).

As it turns out, the one explanation that is plausible and fits with know laws of biology, etc. is that a Creator started life.  But many evolutionists do not wish to accept the scientific inevitability that this is the only explanation that does not violate true science.

Evolution has led to the intentional ignorance of appropriate scientific methods. It became a religion for many in the 19th century, and remains one for many today.  Shunning or insulting scientists who come out with the truth is one way that they hope to control public debate on the matter.

But the truth is still the truth, as “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1), etc.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

Is God’s Existence Logical? Some say it is not logical to believe in God. Is that true?
Is Evolution Probable or Impossible or Is God’s Existence Logical? Part II This short article clearly answers what ‘pseudo-scientists’ refuse to acknowledge. Here is a link to a YouTube video titled Quickly Disprove Evolution as the Origin of Life.
How Old is the Earth and How Long Were the Days of Creation? Does the Bible allow for the creation of the universe and earth billions of years ago? Why do some believe they are no older than 6,000 years old? What is the gap theory? Where the days of creation in Genesis 1:3 through 2:3 24 hours long?
Where Did God Come From? Any ideas? And how has God been able to exist? Who is God?
How is God Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and Omniscient? Here is a biblical article which answers what many really wonder about it.
Has time been lost? It Saturday the seventh day of the week?
Why Were You Born? Why did God make you? Herbert W. Armstrong wrote this as a booklet on this important subject. You may also wish to read the article What is Your Destiny? or watch the video, also titled What is Your Destiny?
What is the Meaning of Life? Who does God say is happy? What is your ultimate destiny? Do you really know? Does God actually have a plan for YOU personally? There is also a video titled What is the meaning of your life?

Get news like the above sent to you on a daily basis

Your email will not be shared. You may unsubscribe at anytime.